I want to run a meta-analysis on "corticosteroids in the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock". Unfortunately it is already done. What do we do in such case? Can it be done again? Any suggestion would be appreciated. Thank you in advance.
If any new research has been published since the previous meta-analysis it is worthwhile repeating the analysis. Also, changing the PICO (e.g. different outcomes) would provide additional information not contained in the previous meta-analysis.
There are many instances in which repeated meta-analyses have been undertaken,and if new data and knowledge can be included,that may improve or alter the outcome significantly,then it's a valid exercise to undertake.
The opposite however is also true,in that presenting another analysis that provides no new insight may offer no useful benefit.
You may equally change the inclusion criteria and update your search strategy and then include the already published meta-analysis into your study to see if your criteria will make you include some of the studies included in the previous meta-analysis. Certainly you may be able to get a justification for your review. Additional, you should also check if the previous review is obsolete to get another justification.
Be very careful with this issue, it's very risky and conflicting. The best is to follow the advise from Musa Sani Dan-Azumi. If you decide to make your meta-aalysis, you should include newer studies (if there are any) and also refer to the conflicting meta-analysis. You have to present your data very convinicing, that they are not a "duplicate" and the idea arises from an own initiative. It will be a "hard day's night".
You can do a network meta-analysis. This study model is based on Bayesian statistics and seeks the relationship of its topic of interest (steroids) with other interventions in sepsis.
If you think your selected topic has already been done then why on earth would you want to pursue it? Meta-analysis is a design used to answer a gap in knowledge and if that gap does not exist then why do you still want to pursue a meta-analysis? A new meta-analysis should only be undertaken if a gap in knowledge exists and you believe you have the expertise to undertake a meta-analysis whose purpose is to conclusively answer a critical question.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Kinesiology
- Running